Want tax & accounting tips and insights?

Sign up for our newsletter.

I confirm this is a service inquiry and not an advertising message or solicitation. By clicking “Submit”, I acknowledge and agree to the creation of an account and to the and .

Michigan’s Cannabis Tax Court Battle: Implications for Voters and Businesses

Michigan is once again at the epicenter of a significant debate over cannabis taxation, this time revolving around a controversial 24% wholesale marijuana tax. This tax is facing a constitutional challenge, drawing national scrutiny for its potential ramifications on cannabis pricing and its implications for voter-approved legislation and tax policy in broader contexts.

Whether you are a cannabis consumer or a resident from another state, this case has widespread significance. The outcome could influence the framework other states use concerning cannabis taxation and may signal future legal confrontations as this industry matures.

Here’s what Americans need to understand about this landmark case.

Understanding Michigan’s Proposal

As part of the 2025–2026 fiscal plan, Michigan legislators sanctioned a 24% wholesale tax on cannabis, intended to generate funds for vital road improvements. This tax is unique as it applies to transactions earlier in the supply chain, preceding the arrival of products on dispensary shelves.

Michigan's existing tax framework encompasses:

  • A 10% excise tax on retail cannabis transactions, a policy voter-endorsed in 2018.

  • A 6% state sales tax. Should the new wholesale tax proceed, it would establish one of the most complex cannabis tax structures in the nation.

Why Did the Cannabis Industry Initiate Legal Proceedings?

The Michigan Cannabis Industry Association (MCIA) contends that this tax is unconstitutional. Their argument is grounded in a legal concept:

The 2018 voter-approved marijuana statute cannot be revised without a supermajority legislative vote. Image 2

This law, enacted via the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA), holds protections that demand a three-fourths supermajority for amendments.

The legislature approved the wholesale tax with a mere simple majority.

MCIA spokesperson Rose Tantraphol underscored the implications in a statement to Michigan Advance:

“As the predominant cannabis trade association, we are advocating in court for the protection of Michigan voters’ expressed will.” (Source: Michigan Advance)

Industry advocates also caution that this tax hike could escalate business costs, strain small enterprises, and direct consumers towards illicit markets — trends observable in high-tax states like California.

The State’s Perspective on the Tax

Michigan's officials defend the tax's legality by asserting:

  • The tax is a new measure, distinct from the 2018 cannabis statute.

  • The legislature possesses the requisite authority to implement taxes for budgetary demands.

  • Its objective is focused on improving road infrastructure, not altering cannabis policies.

Courts' approval could see the tax enacted by January 1, 2026.

Consumer Impact Nationwide

This development also bears importance for consumers throughout the U.S., given that cannabis tax frameworks tend to reverberate across state lines. In the event the tax survives legal challenges:Image 3

  • Wholesale prices are expected to increase.

  • Retail pricing may ascend in response.

  • Some consumers might resort to more affordable, unregulated markets.

  • Smaller businesses could encounter increased pressures or face consolidation.

On the contrary, the tax's nullification would mean the retention of Michigan’s current tax advantage, which remains economically viable on a national scale.

The Case’s National Relevance

Though the lawsuit is situated in Michigan, its reach is expansive.

1. It challenges the sanctity of voter-endorsed initiatives.

Should lawmakers possess the latitude to introduce taxes without supermajority endorsement, it could redefine ballot initiative dynamics nationwide.

2. It may shape other states’ cannabis tax policies.

States with infrastructure deficits might adopt similar taxation models if Michigan's legislation prevails.

3. It accentuates the disparity in cannabis tax regimes.

Divergent state policies, from Oregon's lower-taxes keeping legal avenues viable to California’s high taxes boosting illicit markets, illustrate the spectrum.

This Michigan case could provide a legal framework for similar tax disputes in various states.

Looking Ahead

A Michigan Court of Claims judge has recently reviewed initial legal arguments and a decision is anticipated shortly. It is plausible this case could escalate to the Michigan Supreme Court.

Irrespective of its resolution, the judgment will resonate beyond Michigan’s cannabis sector, influencing state-level regulatory approaches to voter-endorsed laws, new industry taxation, and fiscal sovereignty nationwide.

Share this article...
Bryant CPA, LLC Hello there. How can we help?
Welcome to TaxBot. Your smart tax assistant, simplifying deductions and maximizing returns.
Please fill out the form and our team will get back to you shortly The form was sent successfully